First came the Wall St Journal story about enemy hackers planting "take-over-this-computer" code in critical machines running the electric power grid. If it works, the enemy will be able to turn out the lights in America come war time. Then comes a second Journal story, about vast amounts of data on the F22 fighter plane stolen by somebody.
The F22 story has a few loose ends. The Journal didn't say whether the data was classified or not. Loss of classified data is much more serious, because classifed data is never kept on a machine connected to the public internet. Loss of classified means either someone violated security procedures, or the enemy has learned how to invade secure networks.
The take away from these two stories, is simple. Data on corporate networks is easily taken by anyone. Think about acquiring your competitor's designs, drawings, test procedures, customer lists, payroll, build costs, in short every bit of intellectual property he has. Think about your competitor doing the same thing to you. How long can you compete in the market if all your plans are public knowledge?
The fix is simple. Don't put important stuff on the corporate network. Your corporate computers all run Windows, the most vulnerable operating system known to man. The network linking them together is all run by Windows. Windows can be cracked by highschool kids.
Corporate networks tied to the public internet closely enough for email to work, are vulnerable and despite corporate IT's best efforts, the hackers can get in. The only solution is to keep important data OFF the network.
Let the hackers wade thru zillions of chitchat emails. That will keep 'em busy. Don't feed them red meat.
Friday, April 24, 2009
Paper or Plastic?
One good thing about paper, it burns. Paper and cardboard packaging goes into the fireplace and that's the end of it. If its plastic, it goes into a $1.50 Pay-as-you-throw bag.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Smith & Wesson 460XVR Super Magnum revolver
Last month we had the .45 cal pocket pistol, this month we have a wild and crazy hand cannon. Smith claims a muzzle velocity of 2200 foot per second from this humungous 4 1/2 pound 15 inch long, .45 caliber revolver. The muzzle velocity is rifle grade, resulting a pistol that hits as hard as a rifle. It weighs nearly as much as an M16. It's a revolver, presumably 'cause only a revolver is strong enough to contain the 56000 pounds per square inch chamber pressure.
This Smith has twice the muzzle velocity and hence four times the hitting power of Dirty Harry's celebrated .44 Magnum. Since that movie was made the "most powerful handgun in the world" has become four X more powerful.
The article in American Rifleman mentions a muzzle blast so loud as to demand wearing ear defenders OVER ear plugs and avoiding indoor ranges completely. Recoil is described as "stout".
MSRP $1446.
I'm thinking this is show off gun, too heavy, too loud, and too hard to shoot for use in the field. But it's cool.
This Smith has twice the muzzle velocity and hence four times the hitting power of Dirty Harry's celebrated .44 Magnum. Since that movie was made the "most powerful handgun in the world" has become four X more powerful.
The article in American Rifleman mentions a muzzle blast so loud as to demand wearing ear defenders OVER ear plugs and avoiding indoor ranges completely. Recoil is described as "stout".
MSRP $1446.
I'm thinking this is show off gun, too heavy, too loud, and too hard to shoot for use in the field. But it's cool.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Is the Sun getting brighter? or Dimmer?
Probably not. But the measurements are not accurate enough to be sure. Only satellite observations really count. Changes in levels of air pollution over the past 30 years throw ground based measurements off. As might be expected, the measurements from different satellites are different by a small mount. For instance Nimbus 7 , launched in 1978 and out of service by 1993, gives Total Solar Irradiation as 1373 watts per square meter. The ACRIM 1 satellite, active from 1980 to 1990, gives a lower number of 1368 watts per square meter. Other satellites give other numbers. The spread from high to low from 1978 to today is about 0.6 percent.
The raw data suggests that the sun has cooled off by 0.6% since 1978. But it's more convincing to say that modern satellites read just a little bit lower than the first satellite launched 30 years ago. It is possible to correct the satellite data to make them read the same. If this is done, some conclude that the Sun has cooled by 0.047% but others say the corrections should be done differently.
All of the satellites are/were sensitive enough to see the 11 year sunspot cycle. From sunspot max to sunspot min is about 0.1%. Personally I think the change in solar output over the sunspot cycle is too small to effect weather or climate. No one has shown an 11 year cycle in any sort of earth weather data. The long term change in solar output, after corrections, is smaller than the sunspot variation.
Bottom line, the long term change in solar output is too small to see reliably with current satellites, the change (if any) is too small to detect.
This data makes it hard for me to believe that solar variation has anything to do with global warming since 1978.
The raw data suggests that the sun has cooled off by 0.6% since 1978. But it's more convincing to say that modern satellites read just a little bit lower than the first satellite launched 30 years ago. It is possible to correct the satellite data to make them read the same. If this is done, some conclude that the Sun has cooled by 0.047% but others say the corrections should be done differently.
All of the satellites are/were sensitive enough to see the 11 year sunspot cycle. From sunspot max to sunspot min is about 0.1%. Personally I think the change in solar output over the sunspot cycle is too small to effect weather or climate. No one has shown an 11 year cycle in any sort of earth weather data. The long term change in solar output, after corrections, is smaller than the sunspot variation.
Bottom line, the long term change in solar output is too small to see reliably with current satellites, the change (if any) is too small to detect.
This data makes it hard for me to believe that solar variation has anything to do with global warming since 1978.
When does a laptop need more ram?
Answer, when the commit charge is double the size of physical memory. And the disk activity light comes on steady and the machine slows to a crawl.
Windows uses an old operating system trick, when it runs of out memory to run programs, it swaps stuff in memory out to hard disk and loads whatever it was that wanted into memory. This allows Windows to run modern bloatware on small memory computers. When the bloatware is too fat to fit into memory, Windows just loads the part immediately needed, and swaps in other parts when necessary.
This works after a fashion, but when over done it leads to thrashing. Windows swaps in something new and throws something else out of memory. Then the part just tossed is needed so Windows loads it back over something that is needed next and so on. Progress drops close to zero and disk activity goes berserk.
Laptop had been hapily running MS Office, Firefox, Thunderbird, and WinXP all in 256 Megabytes of RAM. Then I asked Kodak Easyshare to print a single picture on the inkjet. Hoo boy. Machine locks up, disk activity LED comes on solid. Minutes pass. I wait and eventually the print emerges from the inkjet. Many minutes.
I look in Task Manager (Ctl-Alt-Delete). Physical Memory 256 Meg. Peak Commit Charge 556 Meg. Uh oh. Commit charge is Microsoft jargon for all the physical memory in use plus all the stuff waiting in the swap file to get into physical memory. Easyshare is so plump that it requires twice as much memory as the poor old laptop has.
Hmm. Maybe 256 Megs of Ram is a little chintzy these days. Open up the bottom of the laptop and find just one memory stick, a 256 Meg stick, plus an empty RAM socket. All I gotta do is buy another stick of memory and double my RAM. Some time later at Staples, they don't have 256 Meg memory sticks anymore, they are obsolete. But $30 gets a 512 Meg stick that fits, and the laptop boots up with 256 + 512 = 768 Meg. Cool.
When I started in this business 128K (K not Meg) of Ram on a PDP-11 was enough to run a seven user timeshare system. Now I need 768 Meg just to print a picture.
Windows uses an old operating system trick, when it runs of out memory to run programs, it swaps stuff in memory out to hard disk and loads whatever it was that wanted into memory. This allows Windows to run modern bloatware on small memory computers. When the bloatware is too fat to fit into memory, Windows just loads the part immediately needed, and swaps in other parts when necessary.
This works after a fashion, but when over done it leads to thrashing. Windows swaps in something new and throws something else out of memory. Then the part just tossed is needed so Windows loads it back over something that is needed next and so on. Progress drops close to zero and disk activity goes berserk.
Laptop had been hapily running MS Office, Firefox, Thunderbird, and WinXP all in 256 Megabytes of RAM. Then I asked Kodak Easyshare to print a single picture on the inkjet. Hoo boy. Machine locks up, disk activity LED comes on solid. Minutes pass. I wait and eventually the print emerges from the inkjet. Many minutes.
I look in Task Manager (Ctl-Alt-Delete). Physical Memory 256 Meg. Peak Commit Charge 556 Meg. Uh oh. Commit charge is Microsoft jargon for all the physical memory in use plus all the stuff waiting in the swap file to get into physical memory. Easyshare is so plump that it requires twice as much memory as the poor old laptop has.
Hmm. Maybe 256 Megs of Ram is a little chintzy these days. Open up the bottom of the laptop and find just one memory stick, a 256 Meg stick, plus an empty RAM socket. All I gotta do is buy another stick of memory and double my RAM. Some time later at Staples, they don't have 256 Meg memory sticks anymore, they are obsolete. But $30 gets a 512 Meg stick that fits, and the laptop boots up with 256 + 512 = 768 Meg. Cool.
When I started in this business 128K (K not Meg) of Ram on a PDP-11 was enough to run a seven user timeshare system. Now I need 768 Meg just to print a picture.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Why is Windows slow?
'Cause it's as full of stuff as a Christmas turkey. Case in point. Plugged in a printer to the laptop. Just to make sure everything was hunky-dory I clicked "Print a Test Page". It did. Good deal, the printer works.
Read the freshly printed test sheet. It lists ALL the software files used to print the test page. THIRTY SEPARATE FILES, just to make the printer work. That's thirty times as many files as it ought to be. Printer drivers are simple animals. All they do is take stuff out of disk files and send it to the printer. Every so often ask the printer if it's feeling OK, and if not, put up the Out of Paper indication. Only Microsoft would use thirty separate programs to handle a task that single 8.5*11 page of C code can deal with.
Read the freshly printed test sheet. It lists ALL the software files used to print the test page. THIRTY SEPARATE FILES, just to make the printer work. That's thirty times as many files as it ought to be. Printer drivers are simple animals. All they do is take stuff out of disk files and send it to the printer. Every so often ask the printer if it's feeling OK, and if not, put up the Out of Paper indication. Only Microsoft would use thirty separate programs to handle a task that single 8.5*11 page of C code can deal with.
Free money to end Great Depression II
"Good News! The porkulus bill the President Obama signed into law in February 209 provides for a one-time payment of $250 to Social Security beneficiaries".
Lead sentence on a note from the Social Security Administration that hit my mailbox yesterday. Wow. $250 in free money. I didn't know that little bennie was hidden in the porkulus. I'll take it, I mean who turns down free money?
Will I go out and spend my free money to stimulate the economy? Not likely. It goes into the checking account and will pay bills. There are always bills to pay.
How much did this add to the national debt? If there are 10 million SS recipients, the cost is only $2.5 billion, a pittance compared to the $787 billion porkulus bill.
Lead sentence on a note from the Social Security Administration that hit my mailbox yesterday. Wow. $250 in free money. I didn't know that little bennie was hidden in the porkulus. I'll take it, I mean who turns down free money?
Will I go out and spend my free money to stimulate the economy? Not likely. It goes into the checking account and will pay bills. There are always bills to pay.
How much did this add to the national debt? If there are 10 million SS recipients, the cost is only $2.5 billion, a pittance compared to the $787 billion porkulus bill.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)